Allowed

Abbas Ansari Alias Abbas Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Mar 2021A.B.A./961/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with illegal mining allegations. The court noted the petitioner was implicated via a co-accused confession while another defendants had already secured bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted upon surrender or arrest within four weeks, subject to a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of the like amount.

Abbas Ansari Alias Abbas Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 961 of 2021

¶2

¶3

Abbas Ansari @ Abbas Mian ----Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ----- Opposite Party

¶6

¶7

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Through: Video Conferencing

¶8

¶9

For the Petitioner: Mr. Lalan Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State: Mr. Prabir Kr. Chatterjee, A.P.P

¶10

¶11

02/12.03.2021 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the following surviving defects within two weeks.

¶12

9(i) Duly certified T/C of handwritten pages of Annexure-1 may be filed.

¶13

(ii) Rs. 10/- more A. Fee due in Annexure-1.

¶14

Office to place the file for inspection and removal of defects, on

¶15

requisition being made, within this time.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

Petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in terms of Section 438 Cr.P.C in connection with Barkatha P.S. Case No. 161/2020 for the offence under section 21 of M.M.R.D. Act, 1957, section 54 of J.M.M.C Rule, 2004, section 13 of J.M.P.I.M.T Act, 2017 and section 3 / 4 of Explosive Act, 1959 and pending before the Court of Mrs. Reema Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Hazaribag.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has, after placing the written report of the Informant Mining Inspector which formed the basis of FIR, submitted that only upon confessional statement of apprehended co-accused Virendra Yadav, a driver, petitioner has been implicated in this case on the allegations of illegal mining. Petitioner has no concern with the seized articles, nor was found on the spot and nothing have been recovered from him. It is further submitted that a Coordinate Bench of this Court has been pleased to allow anticipatory bail to the co-accused Munshi Yadav and Birendra Kumar, who were owners of two Poklane Machines which were seized from the place of occurrence, vide order dated 27.01.2021 passed in A.B.A. No. 6975/2020. It is further submitted that one of the driver of the seized Poklane namely, Abdul Rahman @ Abdulrahman has also been granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.02.2021 passed in A.B.A No. 145/2021. It is submitted that on these baseless allegations and only on confession of the coaccused without recovery of any incriminating material, petitioner has been

¶19

¶20

implicated in this case. He may be subjected to unnecessary incarceration, if not protected by grant of anticipatory bail.

¶21

Learned A.P.P has submitted, on the basis of instruction, that the petitioner has criminal antecedent. He was implicated in another case bearing Barkatha P.S. Case No. 145/2021 in which charge sheet has been submitted. However, details of the said case are not known to him. 6. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the facts and circumstances above. It appears that the petitioner has been implicated in the instant case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused. Apart from that, two owners of Poklane vehicles seized near the spot and driver have been granted anticipatory bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court. As such, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner above named, in the event of his surrender or arrest within a period of four weeks, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Mrs. Reema Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Hazaribag, in connection with Barkatha P.S. Case No. 161/2020, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.

¶22

Petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation. Petitioner and his bailors shall not change their address or mobile number without permission of the trial court.

¶23

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶24

Ranjeet/

Abbas Ansari Alias Abbas Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abbas Ansari Alias Abbas Mian v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Om Prakash Roy Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jagdish Pradhan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jagarnath Sao Alis Jagarnath Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanhaiya Sao Alias Kanhaiya Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sitaram Rai Vs the State of Jharkhand